This is all according to lawschoolpredictor.com. My insight is going to sound harsh but you need to hear it. Do not go to law school. Wait a year, add ten points to your LSAT and then think about it. Going to any of the schools of this list (especially the ones you might get into) would put you in serious debt, and offer no job prospects to get out of it. Bad news bears. Sorry,

This is all according to lawschoolpredictor.com. My insight is going to sound harsh but you need to hear it. Do not go to law school. Wait a year, add ten points to your LSAT and then think about it. Going to any of the schools of this list (especially the ones you might get into) would put you in serious debt, and offer no job prospects to get out of it. Bad news bears. Sorry,

Assuming that the above is indeed the outcome of your cycle, and you choose to disregard jks's advice, you should go to Charleston. That city is absolutely wonderful.

That said, I agree - going to LS with your numbers is unlikely to produce a happy outcome for you.

yeah, I took a Kaplan course and went up 6 points on my diagnostic to the real thing. my highest PT was a 162, but unfortunately, that wasn't the outcome on test day.

anybody have any recommendations about transferring up? ie: attending NY Law, Pace, Charleston, etc and moving up the chain? I have a 3.7 GPA in my undergrad law courses (I know its not the same) but I feel I will do well once in law school.

pink_law14 wrote:yeah, I took a Kaplan course and went up 6 points on my diagnostic to the real thing. my highest PT was a 162, but unfortunately, that wasn't the outcome on test day.

anybody have any recommendations about transferring up? ie: attending NY Law, Pace, Charleston, etc and moving up the chain? I have a 3.7 GPA in my undergrad law courses (I know its not the same) but I feel I will do well once in law school.

Don't count on transferring. You would have to do very well(i.e. top 2-3 students) in order to transfer to a solid tier 1. I would really recommend a retake, and that you take Testmasters/Powerscore if you were already at a 162. You could probably raise that to mid/high-160s.

If you do exceptionally well in your 1L year, you will be able to transfer up. Don't bank on this happening, though. Every law student thinks he or she is good at learning the law, but not everyone can be in the top 5 percent.

im not even aiming for tier 1, maybe im in the wrong place on this "top law school forum," thats totally out of reach for me, I'm realistic. I only applied to GMason, Fordham, Villanova, and Brooklyn because they were free. But you all really think I have no shot at St. John's, Catholic, or Seton Hall (I went to a Catholic H.S. and go to a Catholic College now). I am really against re-testing, by the way, I don't see a jump from 154/155 to 158/159 making that much of a difference with my GPA.

Breaking 160 is big and if you were up to 162, you should be able to get it consistently with good studying. If you get it up to the mid 160s, you'd be in a different world.

I understand not wanting to test again--I know I wouldn't want to do it! It may, though, be able to make a HUGE difference in your life and would absolutely be worth it.

That being said, if you're set against retaking, I'm sure you'll get into a few of the schools to which you've applied. If you are realistic about the job prospects and go in with the right mindset, you may well be able to have a good time and be successful.

Any work experience or are you straight from ugrad? While I don't agree with the sentiment that you will have no job prospects from any of the schools on the list (following that logic no one would attend schools except for the top 14). You won't have 160K job opps knocking down your door but then again only the rare few get those opportunities.

That being said, you're not looking at the cream of the crop of opportunities unless you finish very high in your class. with a 3.2 and a 154 you're shut out of any and all schools ranked 1-100 and even some Tier 3 schools since your numbers would be below their 25%. Your best bet would be Schools in the 125-150 range.

While the PS and other factors may play a role, none would be able to compensate for the low numbers. at the end of the day, this is a numbers game and while softs matter, they only do so with an applicant who has great softs, Work experience, or for someone who is borderline. You're not borderline at any of the top 100 schools.

Ill throw my two cents in. I currently work for an attorney who went to Widener and he does very well (200k +) a year and it isnt big law. I also meet with and work with other attorneys from there, temple, villanova, rutgers, seton hall ect and they all do well also... That said going to most of those schools, some more then others, wont open as many doors for you and you will have to work your ass off. Also big law won't be in the cards IMHO(not everyone wants big law though). That said, you could go to those schools and do well there and be successful in life. There is a lot of doom and gloom on this site that if you do not attend a T20 school you'll drown in debt and never get a job and that is not true(though things will be more difficult). Also, I would recommend that if you did get accepted to any of those, do not go to NY, as others said its a saturated market and will make it that much harder to get a job. This is of course assuming you do not believe you cannot score any higher on the LSAT/ do not want to wait another year to start school. Good luck

Last edited by jlnoa0915 on Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

pink_law14 wrote:Hispanic... if fordham is still a stretch, do you think brooklyn is as well?

Less so, but yes. I think you should hope for waitlists at those two and then get another LOR or write a good LOCI to try to get in from there.

What kind of hispanic? People say Mexican is the only truly considered hispanic URM, but who knows. You should have said URM to begin with, it makes a HUGE difference. Check the URM button on lawschoolpredictor and see what happens. It may not be perfect but for my cycle I have been rejected at all the Reds and half the oranges, waitlisted at the other half of orange, and accepted to all the greens. So obviously it makes a close enough guess.

Edited to add: Now that you are URM , I double extra say you need to retake the LSAT. If you managed to break 160, and with enough work anyone can, you would be in a position to attend some really excellent schools. It would be really, really dumb not to retake.

jks289 wrote:Now that you are URM , I double extra say you need to retake the LSAT. If you managed to break 160, and with enough work anyone can, you would be in a position to attend some really excellent schools. It would be really, really dumb not to retake.

I'm not a URM, but LSP has been somewhat poor in predicting my cycle. I was rejected by both of the schools that I was Strong Consider for (Cornell and Texas), and waitlisted or rejected by all Considers. I didn't even apply to any Weak Considers or Deny's (which were only HYSCCN).

jks289 wrote:Check the URM button on lawschoolpredictor and see what happens. It may not be perfect but for my cycle I have been rejected at all the Reds and half the oranges, waitlisted at the other half of orange, and accepted to all the greens..